Pic of the Week

View from the Boylan Avenue Bridge, May 2017.

View from the Boylan Avenue Bridge, May 2017.

With The Dillon starting to creep higher, it’s time to check in on the view from the Boylan Avenue Bridge. Click above for a larger, high-res panorama from the bridge taken this Memorial Day weekend.

Things to note:

  • Union Station in the foreground
  • The Dillon will dominate this view in the coming years, a given due its location
  • The Residence Inn sort of bookends the view on the right
  • A lot of earth has been moved, clearing out the shrubs around the tracks in this area. It used to look like this and going farther back, this.
  • I am pretty sure new tracks will be added to the ones on the right of the photo, leading to the platforms of Union Station.

Similar Posts:


Comments are disabled here. That's because we're all hanging out on the DTRaleigh Community, an online forum for passionate fans of the Oak City.


  1. Yes, Leo you’re correct. There will be an island platform off to the right between two tracks. Eventually there’s supposed to be more tracks to the left as well. I think full build out is 5 tracks with 3 platforms (one side and two island).

    Great picture, Dillon really fills in the gap from that angle.

  2. The more I see the Dillon from this angle, the more I believe that this project was deliberately meant to fill that gap in the skyline. Once it reaches its final height, it will sit very well among the silhouette of downtown.

    I truly hope this spurs a flurry of 10+ sorry developments in the warehouse district.

  3. Great picture and article! Thank you Leo!

    The below is meant as something to laugh at, but…………
    Could we please get someone to “vandalize” with color, that cement mixer there in the left side of the photo? A great opportunity for a true “artist” to come in and say “now this is Raleigh”! Or Raleigh’s version of the Eiffel Tower? Anything but that rusted out eyesore….Please and thank you! :-)

  4. @Robert – I know someone personally who has been trying to get some public art on that water-tower-thing (seen in the left of this picture), but because it is owned by the Rail Road, it’s pretty much untouchable, unfortunately.

  5. Are you referring to the guerilla art that was painted on it years ago? Man, i wish it was kept there. I’ll have to dig up a photo, I’ll share if I find it.

  6. Is that feeder still used??? It sure looks abandoned and defunct. I was at Boyland Brewpub last night lamenting over that hunk of trash in our skyline…

  7. I’m saying I know someone who was just recently trying to work with the city to turn that rust-tower into public art, but because the rail road company owns it (not the city nor state), nothing can be done. Big Rail Road doesn’t budge for much.

  8. @Leo – I’d love to see a photo of what used to be on it though. I can faintly remember some graffiti

  9. Cameron J, both GoTriangle and Empire properties have mentioned doing exactly that…building over 10 stories in the district. The Legends area was also being marketed in that way, but only a portion of that was sold, and the buyer appears to be making improvements to the buildings as they are…suggesting to me he is in no hurry to demolish them. Anyway the area is changing rapidly. At this point there are really only two buildings I want preserved (they are at-risk I’d say), Boyette’s Automotive would make a sweet corner cafe or coffee shop, and the Five Star building is the coolest warehouse down there IMO…wooden beams and such inside. Also the old Union Station is slightly at risk…ideally that would be redone to look like its old self.

  10. The existing station site is an amazing development site with practically protected views of DT’s skyline. I can’t image the existing station remaining in place after vacancy. That land is zoned for 7 floors and I would expect 5 floors of occupancy built over a storefront along West and Cabarrus and garage platform.

  11. @Leo – that artwork on the rust-tower is amazing! How much cooler it’d be if that stayed…

    @Mark – definitely agree on preserving the Boyette’s Auto shop (and agreed that it’d make for a sweet retail space or coffee shop – or both!) as well as the warehouse that Five Star resides in. The warehouse between that and Union Station can be redeveloped and the Five Star warehouse should simply be renovated.

    I just imagine how much fuller this view will feel once One Glenwood and its parking deck/hotel are up on the left side, 400 Hillsborough peeks up between Quorum and the Holiday Inn, 301 Hillsborough peeks up above Citrix, the eventual new City Hall peeks up above the new Dillon apartments, the (hopeful) eventual monster on the N&O block peeking up between the Dillon and PNC, FNB Tower filling the gap between BB&T and the Marriott, and all the stuff that’s supposed to (hopefully) go up around the Enterprise lot/The L/etc. It’s going to be wild watching this view continue to evolve.

  12. I cannot tell you how many times I have fantasized about knocking that rusted out eyesore down. I’m not sure the criminal charges would be worth it, but maybe I could crowdsource my legal bills LOL

  13. A developer pitched a zoning change to neighbors of the corner of Peace and Boylan. In their initial pitch last night to neighbors, the developer promises a boutique hotel at that site but wants to exceed the NX-3-UG. The developer’s request came with no plans, elevations, or even design concepts to share. They have made no front-end investment in design services to sell their product but want neighbors to give their blessing to the zoning change to either 5 or 7 floors. Needless to say, it didn’t go well for the developer and, frankly, they didn’t deserve it since they gave no concrete reason or information that would compel the neighbors to support it. Who’s to say that the developer won’t change his development model to stick-built apartments upon approval of the zoning change? I think that there’s a path forward that would include conditions that the developer would have to meet and they stated that they are open to such conditions. This will be interesting to follow.

  14. John532 that’s pretty interesting. I remember the fairly recent rendering of a glass office space on the site. There were no plans submitted for that idea either and obviously nobody bit. Is this still the same folks who originally proposed those garden style condos over retail back in the 2002-ish time frame. Peace Townes I think it was going to be called…It looked like a 1980’s version (they got like one presale before an economic downturn) of urban despite the building components being good (residential over retail)

  15. @Mark. I don’t think that this is the same developer at all. This group has purchased the property in the last year. I would have thought that, before purchasing the land, that the developer would have done their homework and built relationships with adjacent property owners (especially the Paramount) if they wanted to exceed the UDO. This sure doesn’t sound like a seasoned professional group to me.

  16. @Evan – I live on the original proposed route and can tell you that plenty of people don’t agree with the main guy rallying people behind this. This new plan has been in place for over a year now and he chooses to wait until now to cause an uproar and make a sensational video implying people will die for crossing a road at a crosswalk. There’s 0% of the city stopping a condo developer and building a tunnel from Rosengarten to Dix Park. I just wish his efforts were applied to reasonable alternative.

  17. I find myself agreeing with the idea to daylight the stream and separate the greenway from the road grade if it crosses heavy traffic streets like Saunders and Western. I don’t really care about the petty concerns of any property owners. I just want the best possible route for the greenway, and that sounds like a no-brainer.

  18. It doesn’t seem unsafe at all…this is not a crazy area of town traffic wise. Walking down the sidewalk on Dawson or McDowell feels way more unsafe to me. I’d say go with the phased approach…get in a connection now at-grade, and put it in the the 10 year or 20 year CIP for the more expensive option later on.

  19. The Raleigh Growth & Natural Resources Committee met on May 31 about Tall Buildings Height ! Kay Crowder, Bonner Gaylord , & Russ Stephenson ! They are looking @ 3 options for each classification ! This is the options for our 20 & 40 story height limits ! 20/250 ft. is option 1 300 ft. , #2 310 ft. , #3 325 ft . ! 40/500 ft. , option #1 580 ft. , #2 600 ft. , #3 610 ft . They also compared Charlotte’s Duke Energy Tower , 54 stories / 786 ft high ! This tower @ 40 stories is 580 ft. high compared to our 40/500 ft. UDO limits !

  20. So sounds like the limits are getting changed to one of the 3 no matter what?

    Thats good but i guess i dont understand the need for these weird “options.” Just increase it to whatever the max they feel it should be is. Obviously the current limits have never made much sense.

    I would especially like to see the 20/250ft limit changed. If you look at any other city roughly comparable to Raleigh size, our 3 tallest towers are actually pretty impressive heights. But after that it drops sharply to 270< and with much fewer towers. A lot of these new proposals for towers are great but they mostly hover around that fairly stumpy 250ft range while most cities have a lot of highrises in the 300-400ft range. I know height isnt everything but having 400H, 301H etc in that 300+ range would do a lot to add to the skyline.

  21. IMO, the real problem of the height limits in the UDO for 20 and 40 story buildings is that it essentially invites the developer to put parking in a pedestal instead of below ground and forces a building to always have a residential or hotel occupancy as some or all of the building as the only way to maximize floor count within the height limit.
    A commercial only tower is going to require ~14+’ slab to slab distance and that simply doesn’t work in a building under 250 ft. If we are ever to hope to recruit more corporate business downtown, we have to be in a position to provide the real estate solutions.

Comments are closed.